Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers/Utah postgame thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

    Originally posted by immortality View Post
    I have just come to the conclusion that although vnzla81 likes the team, he doesn't like any of the players.
    Stop it with this BS, just because I'm arguing againts somebody that's comparing DC to Steve Nash doesn't mean that I don't like DC, I've repeat it many times that I like the guy as an scorer and as a player but not as a point guard, today's game pretty much showed what I'm talking about, he did great at scoring and pushing the tempo, that's his game.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

      Originally posted by Asher99 View Post
      I guess we didn't read the same threads.
      If Hansbrough got a proportional amount of hate for every mistake he made you would expect there to be a lynch mob out for him. It is just like Rush the past two seasons. As soon as he enters the game quite a few people in the game threads would immediately ***** and moan. As soon as he made one minor mistake that guys like Granger make all of the time, they would yell for him to be taken out. Yet they would ignore everything else he does. Just because he didn't consistently score 13+ ppg people thought he never contributed. People couldn't accept him for what he was. A spot up shooter who was by far the best and most flexible defender on the team. A major reason for peoples dislike for Rush has nothing to do with Rush, but how this team used him. They refused to play Rush to his strengths, and instead decided to ignore him on offense despite his excellent shooting. The same can be said about McRoberts, for a little while the team had it figured out, but for whatever dumb reason it decided that McRoberts needed to go to the bench even though Hibbert and the team played substantially better when Hibbert and McRoberts were on the floor together.

      When Price has been on the floor with offensive weapons he has been arguably the best pure PG on the team, but once you take those weapons away he struggles because there is nothing for him to work with.

      The common denominator here is all three players were complimentary players. As individuals they might not be better than Hill, Hansbrough, or Lance, but within the team concept they are necessary and can make your team so much better. When you ignore that to play Lance instead of teaming Price up with Hill and Hansbrough you don't get to see how good Price and the bench can be. Instead of having a group of players who work together to be better as a whole, you have a bunch of individuals semi-working together trying to find the best option for themselves.

      These arguments we have had over guys like Price, McRoberts, and Rush have nothing to do with those individuals they just happen to be the names that fill those roles. The argument has always been about building a complete team that is better than any individual player. With a line-up of Collision, Dunleavy, Granger, McRoberts, and Hibbert we were better than whoever was our best player that night. Mean while with the line-up of Collision, George, Granger, West, and Hibbert we tend to only be as good as our best player that night. People like to say we are winning as a team, but that is not true. We are winning with the same philosophy as the Heat or Celtics, except our talent is spread out over more players. So we are less reliant on one of three players having a huge game, but instead one of five players having a huge game or coming up big in the clutch. It was last years starting line-up that won as a team, not this years.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

        Eric Smith @ Eric__Smith
        11,006 in Indiana for the 17-7 Pacers? That's pathetic.

        Brian T. Smith: Only 11,006 for Jazz-Pacers. Indiana has a good, young team that appears to have good character. Fans know Ron Artest is long gone, right?

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

          Not much else to add except that I'm glad Lance was pulled for hanging his head, and not getting back on defense after the missed free throw. It sucked because he was doing some good things, but he's gonna have to learn to stay focused at all times when he's on the court if he wants to make it in this league.They finally called some plays for him, hopefully they continue using him like they did tonight, instead of spotting him up in a corner.

          It was good to see AJ knock down some open jumpers. I thought he played well tonight until the 2 turnovers. It was bad timing no doubt, but up until then he was solid IMO.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            When Price has been on the floor with offensive weapons he has been arguably the best pure PG on the team, but once you take those weapons away he struggles because there is nothing for him to work with.
            If he's as good as you guys make him out why hasn't anyone swooped in to steal this great untapped talent we're wasting?

            His career per 36 shows him shooting more often than Tyler with a worse percentage and picking up about 2 less dimes than DC. So when he plays he's giving a worse rates than the forums two biggest complaints.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

              I'm more than disappointed with the attendance, I'm downright sad. I'm no business man (despite what my 4 figure bank statement says), but is it even feasible that they just say screw it, 2 hours before game time any unsold tix go for like, I dunno, a buck?

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                fwiw, lance is rapidly becoming my favorite player. he reminds me of tyler last year or baby al when he first became a pacer. trying so hard to do the right thing, but playing without a clue so much of the time. and those shining moments where the game slows down and he can do what he does. i really hope he gets it together. i felt so sorry for him when he came out after getting too excited and melting down.

                man, i miss earl watson.
                How can I thank a post when you put in that ridiculous, unrelated last line?

                Edit: Oh, I think that's sarcasm, too. My bad.
                Last edited by McKeyFan; 02-08-2012, 07:39 AM.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  There were plenty of people in the balcony tonight.
                  It looked scary on tv, literally like you could've filled all the other empties in with the people that were in the balcony. Im sure the majority of those were 6 dollar tickets. In any event, guess I better learn to use the green font.
                  "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    just because I'm arguing againts somebody that's comparing DC to Steve Nash doesn't mean that I don't like DC, I've repeat it many times that I like the guy as an scorer and as a player but not as a point guard, today's game pretty much showed what I'm talking about, he did great at scoring and pushing the tempo, that's his game.
                    I'm with vnzla81 here.

                    Collison's great performance is fool's gold, like depending on the three point line is fool's gold.

                    He is a really good scorer, and it will work in the regular season and the first three quarters. But it won't work when it matters.

                    To get where we need to go, we need a pass first point guard.

                    That's the hard truth and noboby wants to hear it after DC has a break out game.

                    That said, I find him extremely enjoyable to watch. He is lightning fast, he has a graceful way of getting himself open for nice percentage shots, he handles the ball extremely well. But he is not the perfect fit for the 1 spot.

                    Another thing that is making Collison's current tenure extremely palatable for me is his attitude and work ethic. He is doing what the coaches want. He is feeding the big men. He is getting the ball moving on offense. He rarely takes bad shots.

                    So, getting a DWill may not happen this year or ever. DC may or may not grow into the next Chauncey Billups (I say no). But until we figure it out, kudos to DC for doing a great job of playing up to his potential.
                    Last edited by McKeyFan; 02-08-2012, 07:50 AM.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                      If you think dropping in Nash would automaticly transfer his stats from Suns then you have absolutely no clue how this goes. Thats how indiana plays at the moment, slower, but starting from defense, its ridicilous you want to take a player out who is doing good and add a PG that is total disaster in defense and never played here nor has idea how Pacer basketball is played. Some of you should apply for a job in clippers scouting office.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                        Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                        I think any chance for consistent, improved attendance will only come when it's obvious we secure a high enough seed for home court or possibly until once we win a series.

                        Maybe it will happen sooner, but the weeknight crowds seem pretty weak. Post-Super Bowl hangover?
                        Was the attendance any better before the SB except for the odd sell out against the Bobcats?Not trying to be a smartarse here,just a genuine question.
                        Never forget

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                          Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                          Eric Smith @ Eric__Smith
                          11,006 in Indiana for the 17-7 Pacers? That's pathetic.

                          Brian T. Smith: Only 11,006 for Jazz-Pacers. Indiana has a good, young team that appears to have good character. Fans know Ron Artest is long gone, right?
                          I never watch the local news.. But do they ever push the Pacers? I have a feeling they don't. That would help greatly. I know they talked about the Colts a lot the last few years, but they need to get the excitement going for the Pacers thru their viewers. How else are local people, not following basketball closly going to know the Pacers are a great team with good guys?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                            I wish we could get Earl Watson as our backup.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                              I remember when we use to complain how we loss a game. Now we complain how we win.

                              There are holes on this team, but not canyons.

                              There needs to be adjustments, but not makeovers.

                              Some players need consistency to their role, but not to put them in a Posey purgatory.


                              Last year, this team would have folded like a chair thrown by Bob Knight himself.

                              Way to pull out another win.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Utah postgame thread

                                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                                How can I thank a post when you put in that ridiculous, unrelated last line?

                                Edit: Oh, I think that's sarcasm, too. My bad.
                                no, not sarcasm. i just like earl watson. his toughness, smarts. one of those guys that just makes the team at the beginning of the year, but is starting by the end.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X